Domain: transvirtual.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to transvirtual.com.
Comments · 29
-
Re:Huh?Well of course there's Transvirtual's XOE. I've used Kaffe on embedded projects. I've deployed rich-media presentation on desktop's and kiosks using Kaffe in the past as well.
All of that is beyond the point I was making, that all of those are furhter along than Mono, and that Mono will run into the same kind of issues they have.
-
Other Java Implementations
-
Re:Similar article on NewsForge
An interesting question is what about the Cobalt MIPS-based appliances? Don't they run Linux as the x86 ones do? So where's the source code for those?
Funny you should say that. I have a qube2 so I'm gonna try this soon:
debian-cobalt -
Java for AtheOS
Is anybody working on a JRE for AtheOS? Although Java has hardly taken over the desktop (*cough*), there are quite a few useful apps.
Kaffe seems to have been ported to a huge number of platforms, so it may not be too hard to do an AtheOS port as well. The Kaffe homepage has some instructions for people who want to do a new port. -
Microsoft also fund GPLed software...
I came across this page which shows some of Microsoft's Investments over the years. Apart from the fact that Microsoft has never had an original idea for itself, one thing stood out... The have funded Transvirtual's Java Virtual Machine, Kaffe. This software is developed under a GPL license... I wonder if Microsoft had a tough time stooping down to our level just to get a bit of leverage on one of their other compeditors... Sun.
-
Re:As a beta tester....
1. Any Language. [...] I know the Java bytecode isn't tied to Java the language, but realistically, that's the way Sun as limited it.
I can refer you to over 100 counterexamples. I have personally done significant work with Jython (back when it was JPython) and Skij, a nice little Scheme implementation (sadly no longer supported, but SILK is one of several promising replacements).The other purported advantages you list for C#/.NET/CLR/MSIL are similarly specious. Large-fraction-of-native-speed, cross-platform, secure distribution is already available with the Java-the-platform, and the other advantages you mention are at least as easy with Java (Java-the-language and Java-the-platform) as with
.NET. Further, free Java/JVM implementations are mature and widely available (from, for example, IBM, Blackdown, TransVirtual (Kaffe), and Sun, for varying definitions of "free")..NET is not an example of Microsoft "getting it."
.NET is an example of Microsoft continuing not to get it -- reinventing the wheel, rather than building on perfectly good existing systems.
--
-
Java: Kaffe
The GPL'd Kaffe VM seems to be a good idea for the Java part. It has been ported to many platforms and is aimed at embedded systems.
-
Microsoft still involves in Java community
In case you didn't know, Microsoft signed a contract with Transvirtual to support development of a GPL PersonalJava 1.1 compliant java envirnoment Kaffe . You can find the news here
However, don't dream that Microsoft dedicates to the growth of Java and GPL. Some conspiracists suspected that the whole things is to hurt Java development. The fact that Kaffe has not implemented java.security will help supporting the false claim "Java is not secure"
"Microsoft is throwing money at a small company trying to make some noise at JavaOne, the way they do every year,"Jim Mitchell, vice president of architecture and technology at Sun's JavaSoft division, said.
-
Java Chips for tea and virtual mobile machines
right then
you have a problem with mobile phones they cant store info so you must provide it to them over the ether so to speak
so here's WML + iMode
they get the text and convert that into apps
you need to do something select on the relevent *link/button* and the server then servers up another stream for you (and only you)
but wait you are just getting a serialized verion of the app and only parts of it great for text mode stuff where latancy is not a problem but whta about a game ?
you move to the left to dodge the fireball and wait and wait... while the next part is sent Not Good
so we find that you have to serialize the most important parts of the logic or all of it. Now what can be "sent over the wire" yep thats java you just download to your phone the app and frag those bad men in their flying machines ahahah
colour as well and ajustable to screen relitively easy ! security for online buying built in, manages fonts and such well and vectors for victor are now in (after a deal with shockwave)
yeah JAVA's cool yeah it rocks BUT
its slow has garbage colection problems and needs quite alot of room (try telling the folks @ windriver about how little the KVM takes up and they can have a list of application an arms length that will ALL at once fit in the space )
most mobile phones infact I am at a loss to say which ones dont use the ARM arch CPU at their core
now the ARM Instruction Set maps apprently quite well to the java bytecodes so they can do that
but what are they doing about libs will be intresting I would have said that this would be fairly easy but SUN have done some strange licanceing
but it has good things for linux if they chose to implent the Frame buffer and use the pocketlinux distro and libs
http://www.transvirtual.com/pocketlinux.htm
well I hope it all turns out intresting
more info on ARM java
have fun
regards
john jones
-
Bad Model
Im sorry - but my money is clearly on the success of PocketLinux. What seems to be the best 'idea' is that we pair down Linux, build a GUI (why Xwindows? maybe XWindows is not 'appropriate' for Handhelds).
PocketLinux currently runs on Casio's E100, Compaq's iPaq & the VTech Helio. I think the 'real future' of pocket PC's, and if success for Linux will play out in this space is if a 'distro' is developed that is not to closely tied to one device - why not use Linux as the operating system to move the Handheld PC market away from the 'Apple' desktop idea to the 'IBM Clone' idea - where people install whatever (PocketLinux) OS on their current INSERT YOUR PDA HERE?
Have a look at all the PDA's that were @ Comdex 2000 - here at PDABuzz Look at all those beauty little PDAs, the question is are these obscure electronics companies from Asia going to build and 'market' a completely new OS for each of these devices? -OR- Would they be better off selling the device like a standard PC, with the attitude that users can find a OS to run on it. Wouldnt you rather buy a handheld for its hardware (the reason I bought the E100 10 months ago) or would you rather be forced to buy a OS/Hardware combo - where buying one may force you to compromise on the other.
Casio's E100 is a far better piece of hardware than anything fielded by Palm (even today - only advantage palm may have is size.. but its not that great an issue)
Palm's are small but their capabilities, speed, screens, audio(?) are less than optimal.
What I want is the PalmComputer market to move in the direction of the PC market - that way we can have our cake (hardware) and eat it too (PocketLinux).
What I would like to see: Both Palm and PocketPC get caught with their pants down (ala Apple in the 80s) while each of these "I have a wonder Palm PC but no 'marketing' or 'OS' to sell with it" (ala IBM Clone shops in the 80s) brings their product to market and aids Transvirtual in building PocketLinux. This basic change is bound to occur in the handheld space - Ill bet PocketLinux makes it happen...
-
Re:PocketLinux
-
Kaffe still interesting
Given that tools such as Kaffe are no longer needed on Linux now that we have a complete, official JDK from Sun (with a better JIT as well, see the August LJ for info), I think that Transvirtual was thrown into a situation in which there was no future for them in the Linux world.
Kaffe still has an impressing list of supported operating systems and processors. And that list is not even complete, they changed it recently, there also is support for FreeBSD and I don't know what else is missing. They even claim to support the Hurd / i386 ;-) Even if the more 'important' of these platforms are now covered by IBM and Sun, it's great to have a free JVM that seems to be relatively easily portable to new platforms. So Kaffe is definitely needed! And although Linux JVM's are available, the diversity is a great thing to have. -
Re:What about PocketLinux?Screenshots are now at:
http://www.transvirtual.com/pocketlinux
.htm
http://www.transvirtual.com/poc ketlinux-screens.htm ... and the source is available too. -
Re:What about PocketLinux?Screenshots are now at:
http://www.transvirtual.com/pocketlinux
.htm
http://www.transvirtual.com/poc ketlinux-screens.htm ... and the source is available too. -
Re:Java = Language + RTL + VM / compiler
The problem can be overcome, and has been overcome uncountable times, using ISO C.
Of course these problems are avoidable, but practice shows that all errors that a language allows you to be done will be done by someone, even if every good book on software engineering tells you not to.
The example may have been a poor one, but it's something everybody probably has seen in some ugly code snippet.
On the portability issue, I'm not sure how difficult it is to create a new VM / compiler. I guess it depends on how much the new platform differs from the other ones. Is it easier to create a Unix XY port if you already have a VM for Unix YZ? I would say so, but I don't know exactly, maybe one of the Blackdown people can answer this (some of them are reading slashdot comments on Java IIRC).
Sun has defined three different Java editions, including a micro edition, to address the problem of embedded systems and handheld devices. The micro edition only includes a subset of the functionality of the standard or enterprise edition. A description can be found on Sun's website.
On the number of platforms for which there are compilers and virtual machines, there are many. Kaffe alone has more than 30 OS / processor combinations supported.
Also take a look at this list of compilers and virtual machines, there are VM's and compilers for all kinds of systems. But for the older and more exotic systems the porting of a VM / compiler may not be worth the effort. Maybe the Java part of the GNU compiler collection can do something for them -- I don't know much about the status of Java support there. -
What version of Java will it run?RedHat comes with Kaffe. Does this imply that Sun is now endorsing a cleanroom implementation? Particularly given Kaffe's development is aided by Microsoft...
Sun's earlyAccess JDK for Linux only runs on i386 machines. According to Kevin Hendricks, Sun spokesman only said that Sparc might eventually get supported
-
What's missing?
The published portions of the Java spec include the language syntax, the entire VM (all opcodes, the class file format, etc), all the classes under the java. packages and the Java Native Interface. It's all covered in the Java series from Addison Wesley. Off hand, I can't think of any other info that would be needed to build a fully compatible Java 2 standard edition. Of course it would be extremely difficult in practice, but isn't this exactly what Kaffe and Japhar are doing?
-
Re:Write once, run on supported platforms onlyI couldn't find any information on Transvirtual's Web site about funding from Microsoft. Can you substantiate this?
Vovida, OS VoIP
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product -
Write once, run on supported platforms only
The moto "write once, run anywhere " suggests that there shouldn't even need to be a vote. FreeBSD's user-base exceeds that of some of the platforms Sun already actively supports ports for. Sun to complain that the MicroSoft Java extentions violate the write one, run anywhere moto but the truth is that for several platforms the introduction of newer versions of the JDK has done the same exact thing. The fact that Sun can complain about MicroSoft while ignoring platforms with a rapidly growing number of users such as Linux & FreeBSD baffles me. If it wasn't for the efforts of Transvirtual and MicroSoft's funding of the Kaffe project then I would have given up on Java being internet standard long ago.
-
Other JVM's on *ix
See the platform page of the Kaffe Java Virtual Machine. They ported it to about anything... But it's only a 1.1 compliant VM.
The Blackdown ports overview can be found here. But AFAIK they're Linux only (although on several platforms). They have a pre-1.2 JDK which runs pretty well. -
We have an Open Source one. Who cares about Sun?This appeared today on Technocrat. I hold the copyright of the article, so I can paste it in here.
Transvirtual and the Kaffe Core Team have released Kaffe 1.0.5 (finally!). It's got a new JIT, new processor ports, a clean-room RMI implementation, kernel threads, and much more. For more information see http://www.kaffe.org/
Transvirtual Technologies, Inc. today released Kaffe OpenVM 1.0.5, the only complete Java implementation available with a true Open Source license.
The release heralds a major improvement in the reliability and performance of open source Java implementations. Tests conducted with various Open Source server side Java applications, including the popular Apache/JServ webserver and the Enydra Java/XML Application Server, demonstrate Kaffe out performs its Java Linux rivals by as much as 300%. Kaffe also proves more reliable than other Java implementations which simply hang when running under heavy load.
Transvirtual targets Linux as their primary server-side, desktop and embedded environments. Kaffe, developed using the Open Source model, once again demonstrates how Open Source can offer a better, cheaper, faster and more reliable product than proprietary alternatives.
This new release of Kaffe also offers a number of new features, including:
* Bundling of the KJC Java compiler from Decision Management Systems (http://www.dms.at/kopi) - a complete JDK 1.2 Open Source compiler suite.
* A complete Remote Method Invocation implementation written in collaboration with the GNU Classpath project (http://www.classpath.org).
* Support for the the popular Cobalt Network Web Servers.
* Support for the MIPS and StrongARM processors (Kaffe already supports Pentiums, Sparcs, Alphas and Motorola processors).
For more details on Transvirtual Technologies see their web site.
For more details on the Kaffe Open Source Project see The Kaffe Project Web Site.
All names and trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
-
Re: GPL Java
Plus, there are implementions already under the GPL - notably Kaffe. The copyright holders also sell/license a commercial version through the company Transvirtual, and apparently have licensed it to Micros~1 in a deal involving some of their technology (like J/Direct).
-
Java IS Free Software (no thanks to Sun)
In spite of Sun's attempt to keep Java in a corporate stranglehold, the free software community has produced several virtual machines (check out Kaffe and Japhar), a classpath implementation ( GNU Classpath), and a conformance test (see Mauve).
None of these are complete, but all are impressive and because of the GPL/ LGPL they will always be free software. Sure, Sun and other vendors offer the latest and greatest bells and whistles. Free software is inexorable -- it will catch up. I can wait, and those who can't are welcome to use proprietary products until then.
-
Itsy - what ???
Compaq has licensed Kaffe for the Linux-based Itsy Pocket Computer
found this browsing their site (down the bottom of the page or search for compaq)...anyone know about this one? -
From the web page...http://www.transvirtual.com/kaffe.html
"Kaffe is available under the Open Source initiative and comes with complete source code, distributed under the GNU Public License (GPL).
"Alternatively, the Kaffe OpenVM Custom Edition can be licensed from Transvirtual - an ideal solution for companies who cannot accept GPL code in their products."
Christopher A. Bohn -
On kaffeKaffe is a free Java Virtual Machine implementation (GPLed); it runs on e.g. Linux. It may be that people are working to provide platform-specific extensions for it. Transvirtual is the company started around kaffe by the kaffe project leader, Tim Wilkinson
I don't know about Microsoft's involvement, but it has been clear for a long time that Microsoft resents Sun's dominance in the Java world. I'm sure they'd be happy to have a non-Sun-controlled JVM. Whether or not they care enough having a non-Sun-controlled JVM to fund a GPLed development, I don't know.
-
Eh?
This to me seems to be bad journalism. If you look at http://www.transvirtual.com/downloads.ht ml you will see that they don't even supply a Windross version.Also if you read the article you can see that the journalist was very confused:
Java, which lets electronic devices communicate even if they run on different software,
Ho hum. probably a staff journalists first foray into the IT field.
Joe
-- -
Nice, but is it what we need? I'd like 1.2Posted by !ErrorBookmarkNotDefined:
I was glad to see yet another 1.1.x port to Linux. However, I wonder how useful this port can be. Consider that it lacks byte coder verification of the class files found in the CLASSPATH. (Note: I assume IBM of all companies followed the white paper on this and didn't change the primordial class loader.)
Consider that it lacks the fine-grained policy provided by JDK 1.2. Consider that the classloaders are limited to URL and sandbox models. Consider that it lacks good JFC support. (Yes, yes, I realize you can just path the swingall.jar libs, but the speed is terrible, even if the bug pathes from Sun precede those of JDK 1.2.2; other people might disagree, but I don't find non-optimized Swing a viable alternative. Plus, there's no Java accessibility, glasgow, etc.)
This is not to fault IBM; they've done wonderful work with Java, and appear to be serious about linux as well. Instead, these are just limitations in the 1.1.x VM--among many others.
So, while I'm glad to hear of IBM's efforts, I'm dubious about the need for another JDK 1.1.x port. Particularly one with such a low version number. There are a number of critical bugs in JDK 1.1.6 (e.g., the "contains()" and "inside()" snafu fixed only in 1.2 and 1.1.8), that are likely repeated in this port. (Perhaps I'm wrong; but then why not version the package up to 1.1.8?)
Let's look at the field of 1.1 VM so far, according at least to FSF's tally:
- BISS AWT - A Java framework for building graphical applications.
- Jlint - Java program checker
- Kaffe - A virtual machine to run Java bytecodes. For many architectures, "just-in-time" native code generation is supported.
- Kiev - A compiler that extends and unites the Java and Prolog languages.
- Classpath - Essential libraries for supporting the Java language.
- SableCC - An object-oriented framework that generates compilers (and interpreters) in the Java language.
All of these distros are capable 1.1.x compliant VMs. I was glad to see them when they arrived. But they all lack many of the key improvements in the 1.2 VM:
- automatic non-classpath byte code verification.
- RMI that doesn't hog port 1099, and can be tweaked with a security policy
- speaking of security, the boolean sandbox model in 1.1.x is either too restrictive or too liberal for e-ware. JDK 1.2's fine-grained policies are needed to do anything non-trivial in Linux java
- I could list this stuff all day
It strikes me that without javax support for crypto, security, non-port-specific RMI, and other "enterprise enabling" packages, the 1.1.x ports are not that helpful. Of course, someone wanting to make a nice GUI or web client can use the IBM port. (For that matter, why not use blackdown's more mature port?)
So, while we should welcome this distro, I think the Linux Java community needs to press for a good 1.2 VM. (I.e., our debug and testing cycles should be applied to, say jdk1.2pre2 from blackdown, so that thread safety, RMI, drag and drop and other "e-features" start working right.) It's great the IBM has a 1.1.x distro, but it comes kinda late.
I'm sure IBM could amaze us all with a good JDK 1.2 linux port. It would be nice to see the speed that the 2.2 kernel has over Windows fully exploited in a good port.
[Note: Again, I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth; it's just that we need something stronger than yet another horse.]
-----------------------------
Computers are useless. They can only give answers. -
Rulings are irrelevant and redundantI don't understand what the big deal with these rulings is.
- Microsoft can create clean room Java implementations.
Duh! Can we say Kaffe? Japhar? Can we say "Sun has explicitly stated that this is ok for a very long time, even when HP threatened to do the same thing"?
So, what exactly is new here? To me, the Judge just said "snow is white, grass is green, and MS can create Java clean room implementations". All three things are facts which have been known for a long time.
- Microsoft's current products embody Sun's intellectual property.
Another non-issue. Isn't that what the entire contract was about, the fact that Microsoft was licensing Java technology from Sun? So therefore it obviously follows that Microsoft products have Sun's Java technology in them?
- Issue of Microsoft violating Sun's "Java" trademark.
This to me seems also like an extremely straightforward point. Sun only allows certain Java products to officially use the logo and Java trademark; these are ones that pass their compatibility tests at minimum, and most likely ones that are based on their actual intellectual property. Clean room implementations do not a priori fit this category, so they can't officially bear the Java logo or name. (Unless Sun of course decides to explicitly give them this right.)
So, if Microsoft follows Sun's rules, they can bear the logo and name, if they don't, they can't. This applies regardless of clean room implementation or not.
This also seems to be another clear-cut issue unaffected by Judge Whyte's rulings (except peripherally, meaning that determining Microsoft violated the contract with Sun also means determining Microsoft violated use of the Java trademark).
The only significant thing here is that Judge Whyte has decided that Microsoft violated the Java license by not passing the compatibility tests. Why the emphasis? Because this is what the trial is about in the first place! (See here.)
This trial was not originally about clean room implementations; it's been known from the beginning that is acceptable. It's only about whether Microsoft had a contractual obligation to comply with the full Java spec and Sun's compatibility tests. From that regard, Judge Whyte's "preliminary rulings" are equivalent to deciding the trial: Microsoft is guilty.
---------- - Microsoft can create clean room Java implementations.